INTRODUCTORY
The City Council of the City of Columbia, Missouri met for
a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, January 3, 2000, in the Council Chamber
of the City of Columbia, Missouri. The roll was taken with the following results:
Council Members COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT (left at approximately
10:00 p.m.), CAMPBELL, and JOHN were present. The City Manager, City Counselor,
City Clerk, and various Department Heads were also present.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the regular meeting of December 20, 1999, were
approved unanimously by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second
by Ms. Crayton.

APPROVAL AND ADJUSTMENT OF AGENDA INCLUDING CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Hindman noted that three reports were being added under
Reports and Petitions.
Upon her request, Mr. Campbell made the motion that Mrs. Crockett
be allowed to abstain from voting on B455-99. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
The agenda, including the Consent Agenda, was approved unanimously
by voice vote on a motion made by Mr. Campbell and a second by Mr. John.

SPECIAL ITEMS
None.

SCHEDULED PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.

PUBLIC HEARINGSB444-99Authorizing the construction
of improvements to City property located adjacent to the MKT Trail,east
of Scott Boulevard.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that this tract could be used favorably by
the Parks and Recreation Department for a soccer field. The amount budgeted for
this project is $53,750, with $7,000 of the cost being charged to force account
labor.
Mr. Hood explained that this project originated over several
years. He reported in the fall of 1998 the Parks and Recreation staff had submitted
a report to the Council addressing numerous issues with respect to soccer and
soccer facilities within the city. One of the recommendations of the report was
to create a number of large, new open space areas for practice that would not
include actual goals. The recommendation also included a 34-space parking area
on the east side of Scott Boulevard to serve the practice area and provide additional
parking for MKT Trail users.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
Mayor Hindman voiced concern over the lack of sidewalks on
Scott Boulevard. He noted a major barrier to the south, the Hinkson Creek, and
said he was not sure how to handle it. He noted that walks were required when
the Soccer Club submitted a proposal for a soccer park on the north side of town.
Mayor Hindman acknowledged this will be a very valuable recreational facility,
but the neighborhoods immediately to the south will be isolated from it.
Mr. Campbell pointed out that there will be a significant
commercial development not too far down the road. Mayor Hindman said the development
will most likely have sidewalks and this would create a gap. Mr. Campbell noted
the major need for soccer fields and said he did not want to see the project
delayed. Mayor Hindman said he realized that, but felt the City should be held
to the same standards as others in regards to sidewalks. He explained that it
does not necessarily have to be a concrete sidewalk, but he thought some type
of path is necessary.
Mr. Campbell made the motion that the staff be directed to
examine alternative methods of some type of walking path along the area. The
motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman and approved unanimously by voice vote.
B444-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as
follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN.
VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B445-99Authorizing construction of
an 8-inch water main serving Broadway Oaks, Plat 1; authorizing paymentof
differential costs; appropriating funds.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted that this bill and the following four all relate
to water main extensions. He explained that it is City policy to pay for the
extra diameter water pipe if it is considered a community benefit. He explained
the calculated amounts are paid out of the Water and Light fund, and the cost
of this project in Broadway Oaks Subdivision is $2,775.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
Mr. John noted the range in costs of the water lines and asked
for an explanation. Mr. Malon responded that the cost of a project is largely
based on what is required to install the line, which can include valves, bends,
tees, and all kinds of fittings. It also depends on how the line is going to
be connected to existing pipes.
B445-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as
follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN.
VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B446-99Authorizing construction of
an 8-inch water main serving Garden City, Plat 9; authorizing paymentof
differential costs; appropriating funds.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this line will run along Thompson
Road and that the City's cost of the project would be $1,150.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B446-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as
follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN.
VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B447-99Authorizing construction of
an 8-inch water main located in Vanderveen Crossing, Plats 1 and 2;authorizing
payment of differential costs; appropriating funds.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted the location of this line to be along the Rain
Forest Parkway at a cost to the City of $3,919.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B447-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as
follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN.
VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B448-99Authorizing construction of
an 8-inch water main located in Stoneridge Estates, Plat 3; authorizingpayment
of differential costs; appropriating funds.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this line is along Silverthorn Drive
and the estimated cost is $4,164.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B448-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as
follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN.
VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B449-99Authorizing construction of
an 8-inch water main serving Seven Oaks, Plat 2; authorizing payment
ofdifferential
costs; appropriating funds.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that the estimated cost to the City for
this project is $5,863.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B449-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as
follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN.
VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B451-99Approving the engineer's final
report; levying special assessments for the Conley Road improvementproject;
appropriating funds.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Patterson explained that this public hearing is being
held for the purpose of determining whether special assessments should be levied
against properties abutting a portion of Conley Road, north of I-70 Drive Southeast.
Approximately 425 feet of this street was reconstructed to improved standards
this past summer. Mr. Patterson explained the improvements consisted of the construction
of an asphaltic concrete surface street at 32 feet in width with concrete curb
and gutters, and a sidewalk was built along the entire west side of the project.
He pointed out that while this street was initiated by a petition for tax billing
improvements, it also brought about discussion regarding the amount of City participation
in projects that are basically for a commercial benefit. As a result of that,
the ordinances were changed to provide for the City being able to tax bill the
entire cost of the street rather than simply the local, residential portion of
the street. The only thing paid for by the public are the improvements to the
intersection area with the remainder being entirely assessed to the property
owners. Mr. Patterson reported the project was completed at a total cost of $65,775.55,
of which $61,530.41 is being recommended to be paid by tax bills at a rate of
$82.61 per foot. The remaining $4,245.14 is for the intersection cost and will
be paid for by the City.
In order to levy special assessments, Mr. Patterson pointed
out that the Council will need to determine there have been benefits accruing
to the property at an amount at least equal to the amount being proposed for
assessment. Consideration for such would include the new curbing and guttering
improves the appearance and the maintainability of the property and also provides
for better storm water management, the reconstruction of the street provided
new driveway entrances (which are an improved value to the commercial properties),
the sidewalk will provide improved pedestrian safety for the users of the commercial
properties, and the new street will provide for more efficient snow removal and
street cleaning.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B451-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as
follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN.
VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B454-99Changing street names within
the Village Square and Sedonna Villas Subdivisions - "Village SquareDrive" to "Club
Village Drive" and "Sedonna Villas Drive" to "Sedona Villas Drive".
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this request had been recommended
for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
B454-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as
follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CROCKETT, CAMPBELL, JOHN.
VOTING NO: NO ONE. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B455-99Rezoning property located on
the northwest corner of McKee Street and Alan Lane from R-2 toPUD-7;
approving the McKee Estates PUD site plan.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted this is an amendment to the original rezoning
request. He asked Mr. Hancock to explain what had taken place.
Mr. Hancock explained that the rezoning request was essentially
reduced to a PUD-7 at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. He pointed
out on the overhead where two buildings had also been removed from the plan at
that time.
Mr. Campbell asked how many R-2 units could be placed on the
property because of the utility situation. Mr. Hancock said the actual density
will be 6.3 dwelling units per acre. It was indicated that 19 duplex or 38 dwelling
units would be permitted on the site. There was discussion as to whether or not
the area near the stream was developable. It was determined that a good portion
could be developed.
Mr. Campbell said an early concern was voiced relating to
one of the driveways being located almost directly across from another one. He
asked whether this issue had been addressed. Mr. Hancock did not think it was
discussed in detail at the meeting and he did not recall it coming up. He commented
that staff could work with the developer to try and relocate the drive.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
Tom Schneider, an attorney with offices at 11 N. Seventh,
spoke on behalf of the applicants. He circulated a composite prepared by the
consulting engineer showing the surrounding area. He explained that not only
had the number of buildings in this development been scaled back, but the parking
area was also reduced from 105 to 75 spaces. He noted that over 50% of the tract
would be left in its open, natural condition. Whether the total number is 16
or 19 duplexes, Mr. Schneider said the applicant felt this to be a much better
plan than sprinkling many duplexes on the property. He thought it was a classic
use of the PUD procedure.
In considering the density, Mr. Janku asked if the applicant
had given consideration to moving the proposed buildings back from McKee Street
so there would be more green space along the street. Mr. Schneider said he was
not aware of any thought being given to increasing the setback.
Mayor Hindman asked if City bus service was available in the
area. The reply was yes.
Bill Crockett, 2608 N. Stadium, spoke about his preference
for more of a cluster-type development, thus leaving more green space in the
surrounding areas. He reported in this proposed development, after removal of
the existing buildings and the additional parking space, about 70% of the property
will remain as green space and over 50% of the tract will be left untouched.
Mr. Crockett noted that within 500 feet of this site, 50% of the structures are
single family dwellings and the other half are duplex units. He said many of
the single family dwellings are rental units that have anywhere from four to
six individuals living in them. He pointed out a few grandfathered uses that
have been very poorly maintained. He passed around pictures of the area and added
that it would be difficult at best to try to sell anything other than some kind
of apartment or high density use.
Regarding the units being setback to create more green space
along McKee Street, Mr. Crockett confirmed that was possible. However, if the
units were moved back more than 40 feet, that would affect the parking horseshoe
layout. Regarding the driveway issue, Mr. Crockett said the existing driveway
aligns about 40 feet north of the southerly drive coming out of the proposed
development. He noted the design that was being displayed was not an engineered
drawing.
Courtney Herbst, 4606 Nick Court, explained that she resides
approximately two blocks away from the proposed development. She refuted remarks
made at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Ms. Herbst noted that Mr.
Schneider had said there was a concern voiced by many people who attended the
meeting that there was an overabundance of duplexes recently built in Columbia.
He then stated there was a need for more conventional apartments. She agreed
that many duplexes have been built, but did not see why that would justify building
four, eight unit apartment complexes in the area. She pointed out there is pending
approval for approximately 240 units at Ballenger Place and Clark Lane - not
even two miles away from this proposed development. Ms. Herbst pointed out it
was also stated at the meeting that the streets surrounding the proposed development
are wide and well-maintained. She contended that even though McKee Street is
wide, Allan Lane is not. She said the neighborhood is concerned about the potential
problem of the flow of traffic. Ms. Herbst was also concerned about the lack
of communication between the developers and the residents.
Mayor Hindman noted that the current zoning would allow for
duplex development. He commented the Council is looking at a choice between the
property being developed for duplexes or apartments. Mayor Hindman asked Ms.
Herbst if she would prefer duplexes over apartments. Ms. Herbst responded at
least there would be the possibility for homeownership with duplexes.
Kathryn Pennell, 1708 McKee, was concerned about her property
values if apartments were built directly across from her home. She indicated
she has lived in the area for 20 years and would prefer duplexes.
Mr. Coffman asked Ms. Pennell if the added green space that
would be required as part of the PUD plan would make the project more acceptable.
Ms. Pennell replied that it would not be a trade-off for her because it is all
green space right now. In addition, she indicated it is not apealing to have
all of the parking for this project located in front of her house. Ms. Pennell
commented if the parking area could be buffered by more landscaping or fencing,
it would be helpful.
Mr. Janku asked if he understood that Ms. Pennell's concerns
would be alleviated by additional screening. Ms. Pennell said if the proposal
is approved, she would like to see some kind of buffer.
Judy Johnson, 1516 McKee, a member of the neighborhood association,
said their feeling was that duplexes would fit in better. She said the neighborhood
is concerned about spot zoning and security issues. Six people from the neighborhood
stood in support of the duplexes.
Lisa Wynch, 1110 Pannell, explained that she recently moved
her mother to a home she bought at 2007 McKee. She spoke in favor of apartments
because of the green space. Ms. Wynch saw no difference between 19 duplexes or
four 8-plexes because it would be the same amount of people. She pointed out
the duplexes would be two story, as would the apartments, so she saw nothing
gained there. Ms. Wynch felt the traffic was better now since the changes have
been made on Clark Lane. She said apartments would be a definite improvement
and felt the project would only improve property values.
Melody Derendinger, one of the owners of McKee Properties,
LLC, said that she and her partner had spent an entire day going around the neighborhood
trying to meet with the neighbors to discuss any issues they had concerns about.
She reported they were able to meet with six people that day. Ms. Derendinger
noted that four of the individuals that signed the petition are now in favor
of the project once they were able to see the proposal.
Mr. Campbell asked about the parking area in front of one
of the residential structures. He asked if they would be willing to berm and/or
put additional landscaping along the street to try to make it more attractive
from the homeowner's perspective. Ms. Derendinger indicated this would be acceptable,
and added that a lot of landscaping is planned. She reported they would be happy
to work with the neighbors on that.
Mr. Janku asked about the setback from the street. Ms. Derendinger
said that was fine with her as long as it did not add substantially to the cost
of the project.
Carla Crockett, 1612 McKee, explained that her house is located
on the corner of Alan and McKee. Her biggest concern is increased traffic. Ms.
Crockett's preference was for duplexes because she felt they are better taken
care of.
John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, pointed out that the children living
in this area will be going to Field School, which he stated is already vastly
overcrowded. He encouraged the Council to not allow development until infrastructure
catches up.
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
Mr. Campbell noted that the Council is obligated to let this
development occur at an R-2 level because that zoning is currently in place.
He noted the number of residents would be exactly the same, or more, as that
being proposed for the PUD.
Regarding the screening and setback issues, Mr. Campbell felt
it was most important to have better screening. He wanted to see berms and full
screening on top of the berms to shield the parking lot from the adjacent residents.
Mr. Campbell believed setting the units back another 15 feet from the street
would also lessen the impact relating to the size of the building.
Mr. Hindman agreed with Mr. Campbell in that screening the
parking area would be a very good thing for the neighborhood. However, he did
not see a need to set the buildings any further back.
Mr. Janku thought the additional setback would be important
because building height tends to dominate and could be out of character with
a typical R-1 development. He thought, rather than having the parking lot front
on the street, it could be conceivable to move a building into that location
and have some of the parking behind one of the buildings. Mr. Janku commented
he would prefer to table this issue so the applicant could come back with a plan
that addressed the Council's concerns.
Mayor Hindman believed the plan may not be ideal, but he felt
it was acceptable. Mr. John noted if the applicants were to build duplexes, there
would be more concrete because of parking requirements. He also agreed that the
setback from the street would be important to reduce the visual affect of the
buildings. Mr. John indicated he would support an amendment that included not
only berming and landscaping, but would also increase the setback to 40 feet.
Mr. Campbell made a motion that the parking lot area be bermed
and landscaped as a part of the development plan; and that landscaping be of
a sufficient size and opacity to screen the parking lot.
There was a question regarding the length of time and the
degree of opacity. Mr. Hancock explained that four years is 80% opacity. He was
not sure that was necessary as the berm would be 100% effective up to a certain
height. Mr. Campbell asked what height he would recommend on the berming. Mr.
Hancock said a couple of feet above the curb in the parking lot.
The motion made by Mr. Campbell, was seconded by Mayor Hindman
and approved by voice vote.
Mr. Janku made the motion that the plan be further amended
to increase the setback by another 15 feet. The motion was seconded by Mr. John
and approved by voice vote.
Mr. Crockett asked if he understood that the Council wanted
the buildings set back 40 feet from the property line. After discussion, it was
stated that was what would be expected. Mr. Crockett then asked what was expected
regarding the berm - how many feet above the parking surface and at what height.
Mr. Campbell indicated he thought it should be about 30 inches. Mr. Crockett
said the 30" berm will be landscaped with various types of landscaping to create
a pleasing view.
The clarifications were accepted by the Council as amendments
made to the plan.
B455-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as
follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CAMPBELL, JOHN. VOTING
NO: NO ONE. ABSTAINING: CROCKETT. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B456-99Voluntary annexation of property
located on the west side of Bearfield Road, approximately 500feet
south of Nifong Boulevard; establishing permanent PUD-6 zoning.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck noted a change in the zoning request and asked Mr.
Hancock to explain the recommendation.
Mr. Hancock referred to a letter from Allstate Consultants
dated December 20, 1999, describing the change from an R-1 to a PUD-6 request.
Also included was a statement of intent.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
Don Stohldrier, 4016 Glen Eagle, explained that he is the
owner/developer of the property in question. He stated that although a PUD-6
development would appear to be quite dense, he was actually asking for 4.3 units
per acre. He commented that was much closer to the 3 units per acre the neighborhood
had asked for. Mr. Stohldrier pointed out that after all of the street rights-of-way
are donated for Bearfield Road and the interior streets are taken out, it would
reduce the buildable area by approximately eight acres. He referenced other area
subdivisions that would be similar in regards to density as to what he is proposing
tonight. He pointed out his intention of putting architectural controls and covenants
on the property, which he has had on all of his subdivisions in the past. Mr.
Stohldrier reported that there have been rumors that he is intending to build
a rental community. He assured the Council he has no interest in doing anything
like that and added that this is a plan for a single family community. He noted
a great need for homes in this price range in south Columbia.
Bob Brose, the University's Water Quality Program Director,
explained that he has been working on issues dealing with soil erosion reduction
and pesticide nutrient runoff control and reduction. He said that Mr. Stohldrier
had asked him about new and innovative options in dealing with runoff. One possibility
for such is a native stiff stem grass to control soil sedimentation and stormwater
runoff. He explained the advantage of this grass is that it does not bend when
large amounts of water flow over it to allow for stormwater to back up and disperse
evenly.
Mr. Janku asked how the size of the area is determined for
planting the stiff stem grass that will be sufficient for filtering the runoff.
Mr. Brose explained it is laid in strips intermingled with regular grass cover.
The basis of how much to use is determined by the water coming off of any given
area. He remarked that it would take two to three years to reach the most effective
capability to reduce pesticide and nutrient runoff, although up until that time,
it will do an excellent job for soil erosion.
Fred VomSal, 4679 S. Bearfield, who spoke on behalf of the
Clear Creek Neighborhood Association, displayed a rendering of the proposed development.
He noted that there is approximately 750 acres in this area that could potentially
be developed. His point was that the outcome of this issue will set a precedent.
As a professor of biology with expertise in pollutants in health, Dr. VomSal
said it is very depressing to hear someone propose that stiff stem grass is going
to protect an extremely fragile Karst environment where there is limestone, underground
streams, and sinkholes. He noted that the Planning and Zoning Commission rejected
this plat because of its density and environmental concerns. Dr. VomSal stated
that the neighbors do not oppose development, but are proposing the recognition
that this is a unique environment.
Alyce Turner, 2194 E. Bearfield, read from an EPA document
discussing the control of urban runoff and how to treat associated pollutants
generated from new development (published in January, 1993). It was her opinion
that the article was indicating that stiff stem grasses would not be an adequate
stormwater technique as vegetative filter strips do not effectively treat high
velocity flows. Ms. Turner stated this option is recommended for agricultural
use and low density development.
Joseph Bindbeutel, 1701 E. Gans Road, pointed out that in
the amount of time it would take the stiff stem grasses to become established,
even if this worked, there would be untold damage not only to the shallow creeks
right around this development, but farther down into the park area. He believed
that two to four years of the same kind of problem that is occurring at Cambridge
Place would simply be a disaster for the local streams and creek. Mr. Bindbeutel
expressed concern about the precedent for high density along this entire corridor.
He noted that residents have been assured by the developer that he will build
to the minimum specifications in terms of stormwater protection. Mr. Bindbeutel
remarked that is not appropriate for this area.
Tony Davis, 4655 Rock Quarry Road, explained that most people
will agree that it is the Council, working primarily with the community and the
developer secondarily, who should have the management and control of such issues.
In this case, the Council is being asked to approve PUD-6 zoning without a plan.
Mr. Davis asked that this request not be approved until the Council has been
presented with a plan.
Susan Bingaman, 2179 Bearfield Subdivision, indicated her
biggest concern in this situation is that there has been no give and take between
the developer and the neighborhood. Her feeling was that the density allowed
by PUD-6 is absolutely unacceptable and she preferred a development with mixed
sized lots.
Tom Lata, 2194 E. Bearfield, explained that he gardens in
the upland section of the area and he could say from experience that the soil
is not permeable.
John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, felt that this situation would benefit
from the 20/20 process, namely full blown public sketch planning of areas such
as this. He suggested a moratorium on annexing any more land for permanent residential
zoning until this process is completed.
Bruce Wilson, 401 Cumberland, spoke on behalf of the Energy
and Environment Commission, and reported they felt that Rock Bridge State Park
is a gem for this community, as all of the City's parks are. The Commission asked
that great attention be given to this zoning issue as the density being proposed
is very concerning.
Don Stohldrier commented that a plan had not been prepared
because of the expense involved, and he stated no one wants to spend that kind
of money only to be told the plan is too dense. Once the zoning is in place,
Mr. Stohldrier reported they would work with the Council to get a plan.
Mr. Coffman asked Mr. Stohldrier about his feelings toward
a PUD-3. Mr. Stohldrier said the density would be far too low. He asked why his
property should be subject to a PUD-3, when the Council allowed the adjacent
property to be rezoned to PUD-8. Mr. Stohldrier believed he is caught in the
middle because there is a PUD-8 development to the west, office and infrastructures
to the north, and on the east side there are some dilapidated buildings used
for job service and day care. He believed he would not have a marketable product
if he built large homes in this area.
Mr. Janku asked about the traffic issue. Mr. Stohldrier said
that Nifong is going to be a self-healing traffic process given the fact that
the state has indicated that by the end of 2001 the new Nifong will be completed.
As far as Bearfield Road, he thought that should be addressed during the planning
stage. He has discussed some ideas with the Council before, but until he knows
what he is dealing with, Mr. Stohldrier could not make any commitments in that
area.
Mr. Brose explained that while it is true that stiff stem
grass has been mainly used in agriculture, it is not the same thing as a grass
buffer strip. He reported that two to four years is the maximum potential for
reduction in runoff from pesticides and nutrients. Mr. Brose stated that soil
erosion control would be effective almost immediately if they use a plug system.
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
Mr. Campbell thought it was very important for the Council
to follow the precedent that was established at the last meeting for PUD development
in this watershed area to provide for stormwater management and water control.
He remarked that by requiring stormwater management to be of a sufficient nature
to control runoff at the same rate as is now required for commercial developments,
that will address many of the questions relating to density. Mr. Campbell thought
the density of this development will be reduced significantly when the plan is
drawn up identifying green space, catch basins, etc. He did not believe that
he or anyone else on the Council has the expertise to be able to make a decision
as to what type of stormwater management technique should be used. Mr. Campbell
commented that should be determined by the staff, however, the Council can set
the standards.
Mr. Coffman agreed with Mr. Campbell and he appreciated the
fact that the City is beginning to recognize and grapple with how to control
growth in this area as it relates to stormwater control. Because no plan or expert
analysis has been presented to the Council, Mr. Coffman indicated he is not ready
to support the proposal.
Mr. Janku asked Mr. Patterson if it was true that a technical
analysis could evaluate the options being suggested to control stormwater to
determine whether or not it is adequate. Mr. Patterson thought that was true
within the requirements of City ordinances. He remarked the other detail staff
needs to consider relates to the permanency of the proposed alternatives. He
said that would have to be part of the approval process. Mr. Patterson saw that
as the real advantage of a PUD, the City has the opportunity to make certain
that whatever is done is a permanent solution, whereas if this property is developed
as an R-1 subdivision, that would tend to be lost with the diversified ownership.
Mr. Janku asked if under the ordinance, whether the City could control both the
rate and quality of the runoff. Mr. Patterson responded the same requirements
relating to quantity apply for stormwater management whether it is an open zone
or a PUD. Basically, City regulations are quantity based to assure that the peak
runoff is not any greater after development than prior to development, and the
downstream critical locations are protected and the erosion control devices are
in place. Under the PUD plan, Mr. Patterson indicated the Council can impose
a higher standard with certain qualitative analysis that the individual site
may dictate the need for. Mr. Janku asked when this should be imposed. Mr. Patterson
said it would have to be done as part of the PUD plan. Mr. Boeckmann interjected
that was assuming the zoning ordinance gives the Council enough authority to
do so.
Mr. Campbell commented that assuming the Council adopts his
proposal for commercial runoff, and it was not possible to have a PUD-5 or PUD-6
density because of the amount of green space that might be required for the storm
water control, he asked what would happen. Mr. Patterson presumed the development
is dictated by site conditions and it would then not allow for that density.
He thought the ordinance allows up to that maximum, but a PUD also allows for
the opportunity of clustering that can provide for more open space if it is done
properly.
Mr. John pointed out that the letter of intent spells out
specific criteria on how many units there will be, how big the lots will be,
etc. He said if the Council wants to dictate certain conditions relating to stormwater
control standards and any other concerns that have been expressed this evening,
these issues could be added to the statement of intent which is part of the zoning
ordinance. Mr. John noted when the plan comes back through, the Council could
determine whether it meets the criteria established in the zoning. The Council
agreed that made good sense.
Mayor Hindman commented that because this tract is on Bearfield
Road, which is definitely not ready for a huge increase in traffic, he would
expect any letter of intent to include some offsite improvements to this street.
There was a discussion about the same ordinance applying to
other type of developments. Mr. Patterson explained that when there is a commercial
development with a high level of impervious area, the applicant usually has to
do more on the site than would be required in a residential area. If he understood
what Mr. Campbell was asking, staff would (through the PUD process) be imposing
qualitative criteria as well. It essentially means that any runoff would have
to be the same as prior to development. Mr. Campbell stated that was correct.
Mr. Patterson reported that staff would require an analysis for both quantity
and quality of the runoff before and after development. He related that those
are the guidelines staff would have to evaluate when the plan comes forward.
Mr. Patterson noted that Mr. John made a good point -- this condition ought to
be included in the letter of intent.
Mr. Campbell asked whether Mr. Patterson could draft something
to do that.
Mr. Hancock explained that specific components to be included
in a letter of intent are stipulated in the zoning ordinance. He said if the
Council wants to add things about quality and quantity of runoff being controlled
by the City, perhaps the ordinance should be amended to enumerate that.
Mr. Janku asked Mr. John if he was suggesting that the developer
submit a revised statement of intent, possibly working in conjunction with the
staff, to come up with something that would address the issues being discussed.
He personally felt that was the way to go rather than trying to draft something
on the spot. Mr. John believed that was the method that needed to be followed.
Mr. Janku suggested that the Council table the issue after giving direction.
Jay Gephardt, Civil engineer with Allstate Consultants, said
Mr. Stohldrier would agree, as a condition of approval of the annexation and
the PUD-6 zoning this evening, to bring forth a plan that will not increase the
quantity of runoff for the 2-year, 10-year, or 25-year storm. He indicated for
each of those frequency of storm events, the current runoff will not be increased
after development. As far as the quality of it, he would attempt to meet the
same quality as exists presently. Mr. Gepbhardt could not guarantee that they
would be able to do that. Using the resources available at the University, he
thought they could bring forth a plan to try and meet that standard. He noted
that Mr. Stohldrier would prefer that this issue not be tabled this evening.
Mr. Campbell asked about the offsite improvements mentioned
by the Mayor. Mr. Gepbhardt said if he was referring to improvements to Bearfield
Road, he thought that was fully expected. He cannot represent that Mr. Stohldrier
would come in and do it all, but he thought it was expected that the City would
ask for help.
Mr. Bindbeutel stated he had heard nothing that would assure
the quality of runoff after Mr. Stohldrier completes the project. He asked how
the quality of the stormwater is going to be controlled or improved if there
are ongoing violations. Mr. Bindbeutel thought that needed to be an important
part of the statement of intent.
Mr. Campbell responded that Mr. Patterson had said the continued
maintenance of the system would be addressed in the planning process. Mr. Patterson
agreed the plan would have to specify how the applicant will assure future maintenance
of the facility.
Mr. Janku made the motion that B456-99 be tabled to the January
18, 2000, meeting at which time the Council will consider the revised statement
of intent. The motion was seconded by Mr. Coffman.
Mr. Campbell said if the issue is tabled, it should be done
so with some degree of clarity. After the amount of discussion that has taken
place this evening, he thought the developer is in a relatively good position
to start moving ahead with the planning process.
Mrs. Crockett reminded the Council that it takes thousands
of dollars to get a plan like this implemented.
Mr. John wanted to ensure the developer planned for a minimum
of 2-car garages. Mr. Campbell also stated there are some things that have not
been specifically mentioned that he would feel quite comfortable with; i.e.,
narrower streets and some other things for a trade-off of green space. Mr. John
agreed. He said his note reflected allowing for 28-foot wide streets.
The motion to table, made by Mr. Janku, seconded by Mr. Coffman,
was approved by voice vote.

B458-99Approving the Hyde Park South
Panned Commercial Subdivision C-P Development Plan.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that a recommendation for approval was
made by the Planning and Zoning Commission subject to more screening along the
east side of the development. He noted the plan has been revised to include the
enhanced landscape screening along the east property line.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
Tom Schneider, an attorney with offices at 11 N. Seventh,
spoke on behalf of the applicant.
Mayor Hindman asked about the signage issue. Mr. Schneider
explained that the proposed signage would be a 96 square foot wall sign on the
front of the property, which is the north side of the tract facing Nifong. He
said the tenant requested such for a couple of reasons; one was that the lot
is directly behind Kentucky Fried Chicken, and secondly the tenant wants to have
a four by twenty-four foot wall sign facing Nifong because they have a long name.
He said the other signs would be a 64-foot free standing sign at the northeast
corner, and a 32 square foot directional sign. Mr. Schneider noted that in a
C-P zone there are no specific sign requirements. He explained the applicant
is requesting more signage than what is allowed in a C-1 district. Mr. Schneider
felt the Nifong corridor to be more C-3 than C-1. He pointed out that the signage
would be directed toward Nifong, not the adjacent homes.
Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
After discussion, Mayor Hindman made the motion that the plan
be amended by reducing the wall signage on the north side to 64 square feet.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell and approved unanimously by voice vote.
B458-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as
follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CAMPBELL, JOHN. VOTING
NO: NO ONE. ABSENT: CROCKETT. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

(A)Voluntary annexation of property
located south of St. Charles Road at the southern terminus of CharlieGoff Drive.
Item A was read by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this is an approximately 20 acre tract
and annexation has been requested for the purpose of extending City sewers to
the site to allow for development of single family homes.
Mayor Hindman opened the public hearing.
There being no comments, Mayor Hindman closed the public hearing.
No action was required this evening.

OLD BUSINESSB443-99Authorizing a lease agreement
with option to purchase with Greenwing Development, L.L.C. for landlocated
north of Smithton Middle School.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this is an effort to establish a neighborhood
park adjacent to the school.
Mr. Hood explained that the 1994 Parks and Recreation Master
Plan identified the need for 12 additional neighborhood parks throughout the
City. One of the sites identified was the Park DeVille/Smithton Middle School
neighborhood. In 1995, as part of the 1/4 cent capital improvement sales tax,
funding was included to acquire three of the proposed 12 sites. Mr. Hood reported
the site they have been negotiating for is a 6.1 acre tract which is part of
a 12.2 acre tract. He said this agreement would involve the combination of a
lease, purchase, and donation. In essence, Mr. Hood explained that the City would
acquire the land at a cost substantially below the appraised value of the property.
The staff believed it to be a good site for a neighborhood park as it could potentially
be developed as a passive neighborhood park in conjunction with some of the more
active recreational facilities located at the school.
Mr. Hood stated staff has also been in contact with the Evangelical
Free Church, owners of the property to the north of the site in question, to
negotiate for the remaining 6.1 acres immediately to the west. He explained that
staff maintains there is a good possibility they will be able to work with the
Church to promote additional recreational opportunities in the area. He pointed
out that the City currently owns 13 plus acres in the immediate vicinity that
was preserved as greenbelt land. He said it is very rugged land, but they believe
there is a potential to develop some type of trail system. Mr. Hood pointed out
it would not be of the same magnitude as the MKT trail, but staff felt there
was potential for a very nice foot path if the property is acquired.
Mr. Janku knew the school has an interest in a nature study
area and he was hopeful this would fit into their purpose. Mr. Hood stated staff
plans to work with the school district and there is a very good possibility that
the proposed park will compliment the school's existing facilities.
B443-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as
follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CAMPBELL, JOHN. VOTING
NO: NO ONE. ABSENT: CROCKETT. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B459-99Reimposing a sales tax of one-fourth
of one percent for funding capital improvements.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this ordinance will extend the one-quarter
percent capital improvement sales tax for 60 months which was approved by the
voters at the November 2, 1999, election.
Henry Lane, 1816 E. Broadway, asked that the sales tax not
be extended for the community recreation center as it was only passed by a narrow
margin.
B459-99 was given third reading with the vote recorded as
follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CAMPBELL, JOHN. VOTING
NO: NO ONE. ABSENT: CROCKETT. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

B460-99Appropriating funds needed
for Capital Improvement Projects.
The bill was given second reading by the Clerk.
Mr. Beck explained that this would appropriate additional
money for several projects that are currently underway, which includes the renovation
work at both the Armory and the Police Building, the Hinkson Creek Phase II Project,
and a sewer line to serve the American Legion area. He explained that the American
Legion planned to deed to the City, without cost, the property that the City
uses for park purposes. Mr. Beck indicated this charge will be assessed to the
Parks and Recreation Department since the sewer line is beyond the policy for
sewer utility fund use. Approval of this legislation would also appropriate money
from the designated loan fund for consultant services relating to the design
of the recreation center. He indicated funds will be paid back at a later date.
Henry Lane, 1816 E. Broadway, spoke about his objections regarding
the location of the recreation center.
The bill was given third reading with the vote recorded as
follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CAMPBELL, JOHN. VOTING
NO: NO ONE. ABSENT: CROCKETT. Bill declared enacted, reading as follows:

CONSENT AGENDA
The following bills were given second reading and the resolutions
were read by the Clerk.

B450-99Accepting grants of easements
for utility purposes.B452-99Approving the engineer's final
report and authorizing Change Order No. 1 for the flood relief structurefor
Wetland Treatment Unit #3.B453-99Authorizing an agreement with
the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission for theconstruction
of a sidewalk along the east side of Providence Road; appropriating funds.B457-99Approving the final plat of
Hyde Park South Planned Commercial Subdivision; authorizing aperformance
contract.R1-00Setting a public
hearing: water main upgrade along Hinkson Avenue from Ripley Street east
to WilliamStreet.R2-00Setting a public
hearing: water main upgrade along Hinkson Avenue from College Avenue to RipleyStreet.R3-00Setting a public
hearing: voluntary annexation of property located on the west side of State
Route 763,north
of Smiley Lane, extended.R4-00Setting a public
hearing: development of Field Neighborhood Park.R5-00Authorizing
a grant application to the Missouri Department of Natural Resources for the
Bear CreekTrail
pedestrian bridge.R6-00Approving the
final plat of Lake of the Woods Center.

The bills were given third reading and the resolutions were read with the
vote recorded as follows: VOTING YES: COFFMAN, HINDMAN, CRAYTON, JANKU, CAMPBELL,
JOHN. VOTING NO: NO ONE. ABSENT: CROCKETT. Bills declared enacted and resolutions
declared adopted, reading as follows:

NEW BUSINESS
The following bills were introduced by the Mayor, unless otherwise
indicated, and all were given first reading:

B1-00Accepting easements for utility
purposes.B2-00Authorizing an 8" water main upgrade
along Hinkson Avenue from Ripley Street east to William Street;appropriating
funds.B3-00Authorizing an 8" water main upgrade
along Hinkson Avenue from College Avenue to Ripley Street;appropriating
funds.B4-00Amending Chapter 14 of the City
Code as it relates to reserved parking for police vehicles.B5-00Authorizing Federal Transit Administration
operating and capital assistance grants.B6-00Authorizing an agreement with
The Curators of the University of Missouri to allow the closing ofMaryland
Avenue and Rollins Street during construction of Cornell Hall.B7-00Voluntary annexation of property
located south of St. Charles Road at the southern terminus of CharlieGoff
Drive.B8-00Approving a replat of a portion
of lot 1 of Garth's Subdivision; authorizing a performance contract.B9-00Approving a replat of lot 12 of
Country Club Villas; authorizing a performance contract.B10-99Calling a municipal election to be held April
4, 2000, to elect Council Members for Wards 2 and 6.

B)Parking Avenue at Rogers Street
Intersection Traffic Study and Park Avenue sidewalk Inventory.
Mr. Beck explained that this study was completed by the Public
Works Department and the suggestion was that left turns be prohibited from Rogers
onto Park Avenue, and that sections of sidewalk in the area be replaced in order
to establish a complete system on Park Avenue between Rogers and Orr. He noted
that Community Development Block Grant funds can be used, however, it would have
to come out of the annual amount or it would have to be programmed in the future.
Mr. Beck indicated he would need to look into the funding possibilities for this
project.
Mayor Hindman made the motion that the sidewalk issue be referred
to the Pedestrian Commission for their recommendation. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
It was decided the staff should proceed with the left turn
issue.

C)Benton Stephens Overlay District.
Mr. Beck explained there are still questions remaining about
grandfathered rights. He explained the proposal to be the exclusion of certain
areas such as the Stephens College area between Walnut and Broadway. He said
several others are indicated in the report.
Mr. Hancock indicated staff's only concern was that the non-residential
zoning districts would be contained within the overlay district and would be
rendered non-conforming if this district is approved. He guessed that decision
could be delayed until it is forwarded to the Council, or perhaps it could be
worked out at the Commission level. He expressed concern that non-conforming
uses are troublesome to deal with. Mr. Hancock reported the neighborhood association
addressed the other issues that had raised concerns, for which the staff and
Commission is grateful.
Mr. Campbell made the motion that the issue be sent on to
the Planning and Zoning Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. John.
Mr. John pointed out that the intent of the Urban Conservation
Overlay District was to allow small commercial ventures within a residential
area, and was not intended as a down zoning of the commercial areas that are
already there. By attempting to down zone the commercial areas, he did not feel
the intent of the Urban Conservation District is being served -- which is to
increase flexibility. Mr. John stated if the proposal comes back this way, he
could not support it.
Mayor Hindman agreed, he thought it seemed that flexibility
would be restricted.
The motion made by Mr. Campbell, seconded by Mr. John, was
approved unanimously by voice vote.

D)Connecting Commercial Developments.
Mr. Beck noted that the Council had requested this report
which had been prepared by Mr. Hancock.
Mr. Janku thought the interconnection of parking lots is an
excellent idea because it could help minimize traffic congestion at some problem
intersections. He said the staff mentioned in their recommendation that this
issue could be included in a comprehensive assessment of the City's parking requirements
and parking lot design. He had no problem with that if the staff could bring
the assessment forward without a lot of delay. Mr. Janku asked if that would
slow things down. Mr. Hancock replied that staff has done quite a bit of work
in that area and he did not feel it would slow it down too much. He said they
could see what kind of public input they receive at the Commission level. Mr.
Janku asked if the parking lot design includes pedestrian access. Mr. Hancock
said it did, it was along the lines of some of the recommendations in the Walkable
Columbia book. He pointed out that he thought this would have to be part of a
much larger access issue, and he believed managing access on main roads should
also be addressed.
Mr. Janku made the motion directing the staff to proceed with
the recommended action. The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell and approved
unanimously by voice vote.

E)Petition to Amend Policy on Prosecuting
Marijuana Offenses.
The City Clerk explained that out of !,849 signatures necessary
for the Council to consider an initiative petition, only 1,069 signatures qualified.
She pointed out that the proponent has 10 days to submit an amended petition.

F)MKT Trail Under Providence and Stewart
Roads.
Mr. Beck noted that Mr. Patterson and his staff prepared a
report regarding the possibility of developing a pedestrian walkway under this
heavily used intersection. He reported staff has been working with MoDOT on it
and it was felt this could be done.
Mayor Hindman made the motion that a formal request be made
to MoDOT for approval of the project. The motion was seconded by Mr. Campbell
and approved unanimously by voice vote.

G)MoDOT Enhancement Projects on State
Rights of Way.
Mr. Beck noted that the City has been granted approval to
receive a considerable amount of TEA-21 monies that the state preserved for use
on state projects, subject to matching local funds and various conditions. He
indicated staff has done an excellent job in following-up on this enhancement
funding and a substantial number of projects that were submitted have been approved.
Mr. Beck went into more detail in describing the four projects. He pointed out
that approval of the projects represents a savings of $164,000 for the City that
could be applied elsewhere.
In addition to these four programs, Mr. Beck reported there
are several others the state is working on in this community. Those included
a phased project on College Avenue, sidewalk/pedestrian improvements at Stadium
and Providence, additional pedestrian enhancements at Providence and Business
Loop 70, the possibility of a pedestrian bridge over Providence in the area of
the football stadium, and pedestrian improvements at Stadium and Stewart as well
as Providence Road in the vicinity of Douglass Park. Mr. Beck related the City
has done very well in working with MoDOT in getting a substantial amount of participation.
Mayor Hindman made the motion that the staff be directed to
obtain the enhancement funding for the pedestrian bridges, and re-program the
appropriated funds for the local match and engineering services. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Janku and approved unanimously by voice vote.
Mr. Janku asked the staff to convey the City's appreciation
for MoDOT's assistance with the previously described projects as well as for
the funding.

BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
Upon receiving the majority vote of the Council the following
individual was appointed to the Planning and Zoning Commission:

Holden, Michael A., 2200A Bushnell, Ward 6 - term to expire 5/31/01

COMMENTS OF THE COUNCIL, STAFF, AND PUBLIC
Mr. Campbell said he has been trying to get sidewalks renovated
on Broadway now for five years, on both sides from Garth Avenue to West Boulevard.
He commented that he would like to see Mayor Hindman's new standard implemented
- 5 foot sidewalks. Mr. Campbell asked for a staff report on how to implement
the new standard in this area. Mr. Janku asked if Mr. Campbell was suggesting
that the property owners would not be tax billed for the upgrade. Mr. Campbell
replied he did not want residents tax billed for the extra foot.
Mr. Janku reported the Council has had this discussion before
and the question will be whether or not to tax bill the adjacent property owners
for the repair at a relatively significant cost. He agreed the sidewalks needed
to be upgraded and felt the City should pay the regular cost.
Mr. Campbell said he had suggested earlier that in areas along
major collector and arterial streets, and where sidewalks are near schools or
libraries, the City should take a greater responsibility in maintaining the sidewalks.
He did not think the Council needed to debate that now because he wanted to get
the report moved forward.
Mr. Patterson recalled that the last time this issue was brought
up it had been decided there would be a work session so as to discuss the policy
issues. He reported staff is working on a report detailing the cost estimate
for sidewalks on the south side of the street. With regard to the policy, Mr.
Patterson noted the City Manager had staff prepare a policy resolution for Council
consideration. He believed it would be ready in time for the work session. It
was decided that would be appropriate.
Mr. Campbell asked for a study on the corner of Stewart and
West Boulevard South for the possible installation of an all-way stop. He explained
this is a heavily traveled area.
Mr. Campbell noted that the sidewalks along West Boulevard
South, from Broadway to Stewart Road, are narrow and very close to the street
in many cases. He asked the staff to report on what could be done to make them
wider on both sides of the street.
Mr. Campbell made the motion that a staff report be prepared
for Council consideration regarding the improvement of sidewalks along West Boulevard
South, from Broadway to Stewart Road. The motion was seconded by Mayor Hindman
and approved unanimously by voice vote.
Mr. John spoke about the City having no enforcement mechanism
when C-P plans come forward. He noted at the last meeting statements were made
relating to architectural features that were not part of the plan. Mr. John thought
the Council could require elevations as part of the C-P plan. He believed it
should be made enforceable when an applicant starts describing elevations like
pitched roofs, columns, and that sort of thing. Mr. John stated the presenter
should be told those things need to be printed on the plan.
Mr. John voiced concern about the proliferation of blue bags
and the fact that there is no way to give unused bags back to the City. He asked
that the usage rate be figured out as well as a return method. Mr. John thought
something could be worked out whereby people could put the unused packages curbside
and they could be picked up on recycling day.
Mr. Coffman noted that in the last few years the amount of
traffic generated by the Broadway Marketplace has almost doubled. He said people
traveling on Broadway toward the US 63 intersection get stuck behind people who
want to turn left onto Trimble Road. Mr. Coffman remarked that it was a growing
concern for the entire community and he wanted to make sure it is a priority
capital improvement project when in discussions with the state. He had previously
asked about the possibility of eliminating left turns onto Trimble as a temporary
measure, and apparently there had been a problem with it. Mr. Patterson responded
that staff has contacted MoDOT about the possibility of getting a temporary left
turn prohibition at that location. He noted the state is moving forward with
plans to widen that section of Broadway. At the same time, Mr. Patterson indicated
there has been interest expressed for development in this area which may accelerate
the need for a signalized intersection. In the meantime, a turn lane is programmed
for this year.
Ms. Crayton said she would personally like to receive copies
of the survey that had been sent out so she can review any comments made by the
residents.
Mr. Janku noted that the City had waited until after the first
of the year before making any changes to the utility budget billing process.
He was hopeful it could be brought forward soon. Mr. Beck said he would get the
Council a progress report on it.
Mr. Janku indicated he had requested information regarding
the cost to extend the agreement with Dr. Davis to increase the number of creeks
in his study. He asked the staff to bring back an ordinance authorizing the extension.
He was hopeful part of the cost could be recovered from the County since they
are beginning to address stream issues as well.
Mr. Patterson stated in checking with Dr. Davis on this, he
had found it was not just a matter of adding one stream, it was adding increments
of actual people to work on this project. He said the current agreement is for
a half time person. By creating a full-time position for one year, Dr. Davis
can add the other basins to the agreement at a cost of about $20,000 and the
study would include all of them. Mr. Patterson noted to amend the agreement would
require an appropriation of funding. In addition, he explained there have been
staff level discussions with County representatives about the fact that they
will also have to be involved in this project, and they will have to obtain permits
at the same time we do. Mr. Patterson reported staff is encouraging that this
be a joint effort to possibly minimize costs for both the City and the County.
Mr. Janku made the motion that staff be directed to proceed,
and at the appropriate time, bring back the necessary ordinances. The motion
was seconded by Mayor Hindman.
Mr. Beck asked if he understood that the Council wanted to
add another $20,000 toward the study being done by Dr. Davis. Mr. Patterson said
Dr. Davis will coordinate the stream partnerships and develop the educational
programs for all of the streams, instead of the five in the original agreement.
He reported this is the beginning of the Phase II educational requirements on
the EPA regulations.
The motion made by Mr. Janku, seconded by Mayor Hindman, was
approved unanimously by voice vote.
Mr. Janku reported that a situation had arisen whereby someone
had called the Water and Light Department and asked for some trees to be cut
down. In one case, it was not exactly clear as to which property a tree belonged.
He thought the City needed to exercise more control over the process. Mr. Janku
asked for more information as to how these decisions are made. Mr. Coffman asked
if the question was when will the City come out and cut down a tree for someone.
Mr. Janku said that was the issue -- he wanted to know if City standards are
being followed.
Mr. Coffman wondered if anyone could call the City to have
trees trimmed. Mr. Beck said a tree would only be trimmed/cut down if it was
affecting a power line. Mr. Campbell pointed out that the standards the City
follows are those approved by the National Arbor Day Foundation.
John Clark, 403 N. Ninth, said the issue was not about trimming
limbs to protect power lines. He said this started with a tree at 709 Wilkes
where the property owner told him the City initiated cutting down a tree. Mr.
Clark explained the question was whether a landlord can order a tree to be cut
down that happens to be in the City right of way at City expense. He said he
was not talking about eminent danger or about trimming trees to control power
lines. Mr. Clark requested to see a report on who controls what trees are trimmed,
who has the authority to request such service, and who should be paying for the
services.
Mayor Hindman asked Mr. Clark to put his concerns in writing
to the staff so the issue could be looked into.
Pat Kelly, 1007 Grand Avenue, President of the Ridgeway Neighborhood
Association, reported she had asked for a treescaping plan about a year ago on
Garth Avenue. She noted the Council granted this request and subsequently the
32 trees that were cut down had been replaced with 42 trees. However, residents
have been disappointed to find out that some more trees on Garth will be removed
- at 1200 and 1202 Garth (Hinshaw property). Ms. Kelly asked the Council to consider
the history of where the trees are being cut down and how much money has already
been spent on replacing trees in this area. She pointed out there are a number
of trees in an alley in this neighborhood that could be cut down.
Audrie Sabel, 3800 Mint Julep, noted the City is annexing
property at a very fast rate with absolutely no plan at all. She commented schools
are overcrowded and something has to be done.
Ms. Sabel commended a private citizen for picking up over
10 bags of trash from both sides of Blueridge Road.
Mr. Campbell complimented the staff for all of their work
on the Y2K issue.
Mayor Hindman thanked the staff for all of their work with
MoDOT. He remarked the funding would not have been granted had they not planned
ahead. Mayor Hindman felt the benefits to the community would be very great.
The meeting adjourned at 11:35 p.m.